How do you solve teaching problems with action research?

There is some value to the traditional American version of "Action Research" as a methodology that grew from Kurt Lewin's original thoughts, and has been expanded by many others, and is the focus of the AI derived-article. But, I believe that for teaching improvement, the Japanese form of action research, generally called Lesson Study is usually more effective. This is because: 1. It involves a broader group working together and not just an individual. 2. It looks at the lesson as a whole, instead of just focusing in on one "research question". 3. It encourages sharing the results of the research for other teachers to gain value from it.

Action research helps teachers tackle problems in the classroom by: *Identifying the issue or problem in teaching they want to address such as understanding the different learning styles of their students, classroom management issues etc

First, identify the specific challenge or issue in the classroom. Formulate a research question that guides the investigation. Implement changes based on relevant literature or best practices. Collect data systematically, whether through observations, surveys, or assessments. Analyze the results objectively, drawing insights that inform further adjustments. The cyclical nature of action research allows for continuous refinement, transforming challenges into opportunities for growth. This evidence-based approach not only resolves immediate issues but contributes to the broader body of educational knowledge, fostering a culture of continuous improvement in teaching practices.

The use of Lesson Study as a form of action research in mentoring can be immensely valuable. First, it puts all the teachers on a more equal footing. The "mentor" will tend to be a coordinator, but doesn't have more authority. Further the "mentee" will be doing the demonstration lesson for the other members, but again, they do not have more or less authority. And all the participant teachers are focused on how to improve the lesson, and are not looking at any individual person. By focusing on the improvement of the lesson, and not the teacher, this helps make the research more "objective", and have less of the emotional pain that can often come with traditional evaluation.

Similar to how "action research" has 4 steps: plan, act, observe, and reflect; Lesson Study has 4 similar steps: 1. Study and Plan 2. Teach, Observe, and Debrief 3. Revise and Reteach 4. Reflect and Report During the Study and Plan phase, the whole group of teachers will do a literature review to find what is likely to work well for the lesson. Then they work together to help plan the lesson, with the person who would usually be considered the "mentee" being the one who will ultimately teach this lesson. During the Teach, Observe, and Debrief stage, the "mentee" will teach the lesson, while the others observe. The debrief process then gives a way of right afterwards talking about things while it is fresh in everyone's minds.

In order to get the most value from the lesson study, the team needs to revise the original lesson, and then the lesson needs to get retaught to see how it works after the revision. The reteaching may be done by the original "mentee" or by someone else in the group with their class. While this is never perfect in having the same initial conditions, it still has great value to see how the revised lesson worked compared to the original. Depending upon how much better the lesson appeared to work (or not), and the resources of the teachers to do more lesson study, this process can be done again, until the lesson is well honed. At this point the lesson should be shared so others can be build upon the work, preferably as broadly as possible.

While we may use the words "American" to describe what is called "Action Research" and "Japanese" to describe what is called "Lesson Study"; don't conflate the country a method started in with, for where it can be successfully applied. It is more valuable to consider the philosophical roots of the two. "Action Research" comes from the scientific quest to find out "why" things happen. While "lesson study" comes more from the engineering quest to find out "how" to do things better. Both questions have value, and their answers overlap, but working first on Lesson Study's focus on how to do something, also leads to a better understanding of why it works, while focusing on why something works first, doesn't always lead to changing how it works.